The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Of the facts charged of this case, the injury is acquitted.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (as to the facts stated in the original judgment, paragraphs (3) and (4) of the same Article) 1) There is no fact that the Defendant, like the facts constituting the crime in the original judgment, had inflicted an injury upon the victim C at the time of entering the victim C as stated in the judgment of the court below. 2) The Defendant, as stated in the crime

B. Under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime (as to the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below), the person was in a state of mental disability.

C. The sentence of the lower court on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On January 8, 2013, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) around 23:30 on January 8, 2013, the Defendant found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by comprehensively taking account of each of the evidence (the Defendant’s legal statement, the victim C, and the police statement) as indicated in the judgment below, on the ground that the Defendant made a false statement about the Defendant’s use of the borrowed money without paying the borrowed money from the Defendant at the victim C’s house; and (b) on the one hand, he made two occasions a false statement about the victim’s entrance to the Defendant.

3) Examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, it is difficult to view that this part of the facts charged was proven without reasonable doubt solely based on each of the above evidence revealed by the lower court. (A) The Defendant asserted that the Defendant had found C’s house due to the issue of return of borrowed money from the investigation to the lower court on January 8, 2013, but, on the other hand, there was no fact of drinking C’s house.

(No. 31,40,72 of the evidence records of 2013 No. 16680). Defendant acknowledged this part of the facts charged at the third trial of the lower court at the trial stage of the lower court, which is the closing date of pleadings, but need to be treated for 14 days submitted by C.